Insurance companies

If requested I will send a proof of insurance. I will NOT and have never provided anyone to be an additionally insured on my policy. End of discussion.

There rest is just BS.

Les

Dunno how you do it but when I put a client on line, I give them a folder containing a copy of the contract, the written call list, my warranty and the insurance certificate filled out describing their system (plus their system user manual). They can then forward it to their insurance company themselves. Years later when they change insurance companies, and want another certificate forwarded to their new company, I retrieve it from their file, scan it and email it to the insurance company for them..

Simple and certainly not much trouble. Anything beyond that, as you describe could be a real pain though.

It also makes me wonder what right these guys have to ask for all that stuff that has nothing to do with a simple alarm installation....??

"tourman" a écrit dans le message de groupe de discussion : snipped-for-privacy@o30g2000yqb.googlegroups.com...

Simply put, they give a discount if you have an alarm system, And the certificat proove it.

And if they dont maintain the alarm system and get rob, the insurane company wont pay cause you didnt cary on your part of the deal:

you pay less for insurance cause you are a lesser risk with your alarm, you have to maintain it, you failed to the deal, you have nothing...

Easy way of paying for the lower rate.. and good way to lower the risk..

RHC: I understand all that; I was referring to the clauses about firing employees and the other irelevent concerns...

HOO!! sorry!!;-)

ds. =EF=BF=BDOne sent

I try not to give the certificates to the home owner. I get the fax number of the insurance agency and fax it to them direct. Now I've got the name of the Insurance company and this allows me to notify them should the client cancel their monitoring. The way I figure it, if the client cancels monitoring, some/many will never tell their insurance company and continue to receive the discount. If the insurance company never asks them for an up date, they will reap the benefits of having a monitored alarm system without actuall being monitored. As far as I'm concerned, that's ok with me as long as there isn't an incident. However, if there IS and incident, and the insurance company thinks that I monitor the client, I can be drawn into having to prove that I don't monitor the account. I don't have time for that kind of possibility as remote as it might be. It's also nice to have the advantage if you should have a client that has to be cut off for non payment.

RHC: That may well be the case in "sue crazy" America but not an issue hereabouts. The customer is totally responsible for his interface with his insurance company. If they are stupid enough to cancel monitoring without advising their insurance company properly, they could find themselves in a difficult situation making a claim that their company will pay out on. When clients do cancel, they are told that in writing.

I give all my clients the best of every kind of service possible. However, I dont babysit their ethics. They are responsible for their security. I just assist

Yup.

On what basis did they claim they had the right to demand whom you employ?

Their "ethics" is not my concern. I'm concerned about me, my time, my inconvenience, at my expense due to their lack of attention. And by the way, it has never been proven to me that an insurance company will deny a claim even if they HAVE lied about having an alarm system.

Has anyone here ever heard of this happening?

Insurance companies, whether they be life, casualty, property or health care related, are all doing the same thing -- looking for ways to increase premiums while reducing payouts.

When we were still installing, I had a packet of form letters for clients to sign and forward to the agent, the local PD, etc. I'd fill in a few blanks and explain the rest to the client I finished the user training.

Whoa. I somehow missed that sentence. They're absolutely nuts!

There have been articles in SDM about it. Mainly it's been commercial or very high end residential cases where the police specifically demanded a monitored alarm be in use and the owner failed to install a system or knowingly allowed the system to remain inoperable. In one case the property owner failed to arm the system for a long time and then got robbed.

The funny part is there has NEVER been mentioned in any of the trade rages a case where the insurer failed to payout because the system was DIY. :^)

I could see an insurance company not paying out on a commercial installation that stood the chance of a big loss but on residential ..... I know I"VE never heard of an insurance company not paying out if the alarm system wasn't monitored when the insurace company was informed that it was and was giving a discount. But I don't know how much something like that would be publicized because there wouldn't be any alarm company to pass the word back to the industry.

Does someone here have access to an insurance agent, that they could ask?

One Tequila, Two Tequila, Three Tequila, FLOOR!